U R B A N T R A N S F O R M A T I O N : CONTROVERSIES, CONTRASTS and CHALLENGES

TRANSFORMATION OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

URBAN FABRIC IN ISTANBUL’S HISTORICAL PENINSULA:
STORARI GRID LAYOUTS.
TAN KAMİL GÜRER
Adres: Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi, Mimarlık Fakültesi, Yıldız, Beşiktaş, İstanbul
E-mail: tgurer@yildiz.edu.tr

PINAR GÖZEK
Adres: Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Yıldız, Beşiktaş, İstanbul
E-mail: pinar.gozek@hotmail.com

ABSTRACT
Urban transformation in the nineteenth century Istanbul is under the effects of
westernization. Westernization was the modernization project of the Ottoman
government. It begins with the declaration of Tanzimat (Ottoman Reform) in 1839
and spreads to lots of fields of the society. Urban planning decisions and the
architecture of the period were also affected from the Tanzimat project by
referring to western urban planning models – grid and radial plan – and
architecture. Many foreign engineers and architects were invited to the Capital for
applying the new planning models commonly after the great fires occurred in the
Historical Peninsula. Luigi Storari was one of them who became known with
application of first grid layouts and subdivision systems in the urban fabric of
Istanbul. His grid layouts had different characteristics than others, which applied
after him. Regions such as Aksaray, Imrahor, Salma Tomruk, Küçük Mustafa Paşa
and Boyacıköy have certain typo-morphological features in its own: grid layout, the
square with the beveled corners and the widened main arteries. This study will
focus on the morphological characteristics of the Storari grid layouts in the
Historical Peninsula.

INTRODUCTION

Eighteenth and nineteenth centuries are known as westernization periods in

Ottoman Empire. Steps taken in this regard loomed large in many areas. The most
important of these steps were taken on urban planning. This attempt was
reorganization of complex urban fabric of Istanbul in accordance with rational
principles as parallel to the changes in the structure of the state. Small and great
fires occurred in these centuries also enabled realization of new planning models.
This study focuses on both the morphological characteristics of Storari layouts,
which represents the beginning of the grid-planning models implemented after the
fires mainly in historical peninsula in Istanbul as a part of westernization project
and his difference in approaches to the grid plan.

URBAN PLANNING TRADITIONS IN WESTERNIZATION PERIOD.

Tanzimat period, declared in 1839, was the beginning of westernization movement

in the Ottoman Empire. The main principles of the process called Ottoman Reform
focused on secular law, systematization, control and central government (Çelik,
1996). The impacts of the movement proposed radical changes not only in juridical
field but also in economic, military, educational and industrialization fields. The
Tanzimat was the end of pre-industrial era for Ottoman, even though the effects
were felt predominantly in Istanbul (Kuban, 1996).
Centralist modern paradigm, which was created by the Reforms, denoted itself in
two ways concerning the reorganization of urban space: The first was related with
administrative decisions on urban issues, could not be made by qadis (an Islamic
judge). Thus, by moving beyond the boundaries of religious jurisdiction, decisions
on urban planning were taken centrally by municipalities (Kuban, 1996).

1
14th IPHS CONFERENCE 12-15 July 2010 Istanbul-TURKEY

The second contribution was application of the Western planning models. Mustafa
Reşit Pasha, who visited London in 1836, underlined the need to comply with these
models because of its scientific and geometric layout (Ortaylı, 1985). The
observations of Ottoman ambassadors who had stayed in Europe in eighteenth
century before Mustafa Reşit Pasha were also full of emphasis about the cities with
the grid plans, large and tree-lined streets and high buildings (Yerasimos, 1999).
Geometric order almost was the dominant planning system in all-modern capitals of
Europe. The new arrangements of Haussmann had attracted great attention in the
Napoleon Paris. Haussmann’s practiced design was the radial plan in Paris and it
was a model for other countries (Ardaman, 2007). Therefore, there were two
models of urban planning in nineteenth century in Istanbul: Grid and radial
planning system.
The great fires in eighteenth and nineteenth centuries provided a basis for western
planning models. There were ninety fires between 1701-1800, some of them were
huge fires from Haliç to Marmara coastline, ten thousands of houses destroyed in
these fires. Buildings made by timber and barracks seemed to be directly related
with the fires (Yerasimos, 1996). George Wheler mentioned the “small and ruined
houses most of timber and soil” in the early 18th century. Pertusier’s observation
was the same even a century later: “All the houses of Istanbul is ruined, stone wall
rises five-foot on a base and a wooden structure not more than two floors being put
onto stone wall. All the houses in the same height and their roofs aligned”
(Pertusier, 1820).
At the beginning of the nineteenth century, spatial structure of the city was the
same: consisting of timber houses built very closely and full of many cul-de-sacs.
1/25000-scaled map drawn by engineer Kauffer in 1776, member of the French
Embassy in Istanbul, exhibits this complex street pattern – neighborhood structure
with cul-de-sacs (Ayverdi, 1978). The planning activities in nineteenth century
were mostly focusing on improvement of the streets. According to certificate of 17
May 1839, a new urban plan was created and timber buildings without “drawings”
were prohibited in Istanbul. This plan declared that the new roads as major
arteries would be 15.20-meter width and planted, pavements would be 3.04-meter
width and 9.12-meter width road would be for the horses and cars. The other roads
would be 11.40, 9.12 and at least 7.60 meter width and cul-de-sacs never be made.
In consideration of heavy charge on the budget, it was decided that the new
buildings and roads would be built primarily in the post-fire areas (Yerasimos,
1996). These suggested ideas inevitably reminds of Haussmann’s works in Paris.
Planning in the post-fire areas was the grid plan. Explicitly, the grid plan turned
into a model, which was implemented in the new settling areas. It can be seen on
the maps made at the end of the nineteenth and in the early twentieth century
that the old urban fabric was broken with the grid planning in patches. The grid
meant geometry and order due to its orthogonal structure and was assumed as a
reflection of the central government. It also meant approaching to blocks from all
directions and fire fighting easily to possible fires. Italian engineer Luigi Storari
planned the first grid subdivision in 1856 after a fire in Aksaray, which occurred in
1854 – 748 buildings were destroyed. In 1848-49, Ebniye Nizamnameleri –The
Building Regulations, were better than the receipt of 1839 on reorganization of the
post-fire areas. A fire in Hocapaşa in 1864 was the greatest one with which the
Ottoman faced and it caused to burn very large area ranges from Haliç (Golden
Horn) to the Marmara Sea. The fire enabled renewal of administrative center and
implementation of Ebniye and Turuk Nizamnameleri in 1863 – The Building and The
Road Regulation. The roads in this area were widened and the use of masonry
system regarded in buildings (Tekeli, 1999).
The grid plan was also implemented in small-scale fires occurred out of the main
arteries like Aksaray and Hocapaşa. After the fires in Ayvansaray of 1861 and in
Samatya of 1866 the grid plan was also applied. Designing of Samatya was
described “with chessboard style, a good example for the best designed countries
in the world” in Rehabilitation of Roads Commission’s 1868 Report (Çelik, 1996).
The grid plan was the model for the post-fire areas in Salma Tomruk, Imrahor,
Kucuk Mustafa Pahsa and Balat regions as well. Application of the grid in these
areas was not perfect due to topography, the size of land in pre-fired and property
rights.
The areas in which the radial plan was applied were lesser than the grid ones. The
plan was used in landscape design such as parks, new developing and post-fire

2
U R B A N T R A N S F O R M A T I O N : CONTROVERSIES, CONTRASTS and CHALLENGES

areas. This planning could not created a systematic hierarchy in urban space due to
the fact that it had not clear rules in practice, the number of the roads – five or
seven – meeting in the centre seemed to be arbitrary. “The applied examples of
the radial plan did not convey the sense of having a centre and also their main
spaces were not literally square although many were given that name” (Ardaman,
2007).
Şişhane Square (1865) is one of the important squares, which was designed with
radial plan method. Although its situation on a steep slope which causes perceptual
problems, one of the street of the square arrives at the Sixth Division which is one
of the symbol municipalities in westernization period (Ardaman, 2007). The square
has lost his form today due to the changes in road network. A similar application is
in the intersection of Kazancı Slope and Mebusan Slope. The radial planning,
implemented in 1910 after a fire, was situated on a steep slope, thus it doesn’t
give the sense of centre. After a fire of 1870, which destroyed more than 300
houses in Pera, a radial planning was produced comprising the area between the
British Embassy and Taksim (Figure 1). This plan was containing a large square in
the centre and some of the streets were designed in a radial method. But this plan
has never been applied (Kuban, 1996). According to Ardaman, the reason was not
topography but the inhabitants’ objection to the plan. Because, a lot of landowners
who live near the centre would lose too much space. Instead of the radial plan, the
grid one was applied in this area again (Ardaman, 2007).

Figure 1. Radial plan project comprise from British Embassy to Taksim in Pera (Çelik, 1996)

Grid planning system left its mark on Capital’s urban fabric in the nineteenth
century. The plan vindicated the rights of the owners better and ensured a
standard order. That’s why it was appropriated easily. The radial planning did not
find much range of application but the grid plan had been kept in the twentieth
century and in the new settlement areas. The first application of the grid plan was
the planning of Luigi Storari after a fire in Aksaray. He applied this model in
Imrahor, Salma Tomruk, Küçük Mustafa Pasha and Boyacıköy in the Bosphorus.
Although, most of them are post-fire applications, Boyacıköy is a new settlement.

LUIGI STORARI AND THE GRID LAYOUTS

Luigi Storari is known as a first engineer who planned the first grid layout after
Aksaray conflagration in 1856 (Çelik, 1996). By his efforts first subdivision system
has appeared in the city of Istanbul. Indeed, subdivision phenomenon was the
major instrument that reshaped the urban fabric of the Ottoman Capital and the
other cities from nineteenth century to the end of the Empire (Yerasimos, 1995).

3
14th IPHS CONFERENCE 12-15 July 2010 Istanbul-TURKEY

Luigi Storari who was born in 1822, arrived to Smyrna (Izmir) in March 1850 from
Corfu. In 1851 he applied to French Embassy to go to Istanbul and stayed in the
city from April 1851 to the May of 1854. Due to inadequate knowledge about the
cadastral system in Ottoman Empire, he prepared the detailed map of Smyrna at
1/5000 scale between 1854 and 1856. He published the map in 1856 in Paris
dedicating to the Sultan Abdülmecit. One year later he also published a guide
accompanied to the map in Turin. After his success in Smyrna, he was invited to
the Capital to realize the first subdivision plan after a fire. The subdivision based
on grid layout for Aksaray region was prepared in 1855 but related statements
about plan were published in 1856 in Journal de Constantinople. (Yerasimos, 1995).
In the conflagration areas subdivision works certainly have a number of rules.
Absences of any plot plan information before the fire, properties could be
distributed according to pre-fired existing condition. But the potentials for the
subdivision activity in the city blocks were limited. There was no way for engineers
to draw a plot within blocks, but they could distribute parts of the islets to former
owners in proportion to their size earlier, and taking into account the privileges
they had in the old tissue: frontage, position angle, or even provision of a well in
the garden (Yerasimos, 1995)
One remarkable characteristic in the grid layouts is related with the typology of
them. Widening the main streets that are connected to the existing ones and
beveling the corners of the junction of the main arteries – like in many Roman grid
layouts – by creating a kind of square are the distinctive properties of the
subdivision planning. He used this typology also in five other grids planning in the
capital city. The grid planning initiated by Storari, had spread to other
neighborhoods of the city: Aksaray Horhor, Fatih Kıztaşı, Beşiktaş Old Market
Square, in the Anatolian side, Kadıköy Old Market area and Yeldeğirmeni region.

THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE STORARI LAYOUTS

The first grid plan application by Storari is for Aksaray settlement in 1856. A big
fire in 1854 had destroyed more than seven hundred buildings in Aksaray. This was
the “major turning point in the history of the Istanbul’s urban form” (Çelik, 1990).
In Storari’s plan, north-south – from Unkapanı to Yenikapı – and east-west
directions – from Beyazıt Square to Topkapı, which is the continuation of the
Divanyolu – were connected to each other and widened as main arteries (Figure 2).
Intersection of arteries also forms Aksaray Square that was known in Byzantium
time as Bovis Forum. Storari emphasized the connection of the arteries and
beveled the corners of the crossroads that turns it to the octagonal shape. This also
accentuated the importance of the Aksaray Square that’s why are described as
“belle place” in January 1856 by the Journal de Constantinople (Çelik 1990). Roads
constitute four edge of the octagonal shape but in the other edges buildings are
taken place. Together with the Storari plan many cul-de-sacs in the environment
are eliminated.

4
U R B A N T R A N S F O R M A T I O N : CONTROVERSIES, CONTRASTS and CHALLENGES

Figure 2. Changing morphology of Aksaray Square between 1850-1870. First map shows the
pre-fired area of Aksaray (Mühendishane-I Berri-i Hümayun, 1847), (Kayra, 1990); Second
map shows the post-fired condition of Aksaray with the grid layout (Ayverdi, 1978).

Another district with grid plan designed by Storari is Imrahor, located in vicinity of
Yedikule and Samatya. After a fire in 1856 five or six blocks were destroyed.
Storari, by using orthogonal grid layout system, reorganized the burned areas and
widened the Imrahor street and the one which was perpendicular to it (Figure 3). In
the junction point of these arteries, corners are beveled again to give a square
view. Çelik (1990) points out another contribution of Storari to the area by opening
the north-south artery that connects the neighborhood to the coastline.
Nevertheless, connection of the region to the coastline is limited because of the
railway and coastal road in current condition.
Storari replanned the Küçük Mustafa Paşa neighborhood in 1862 after a fire, which
destroyed the 242 buildings from golden horn to the north hill of the city (Ergin,
1914-22). Post-fire planning system was grid one and lots of cul-de-sacs were
eliminated. While block sizes were suitable with the existing conditions, Kara
Sarıklı Street was widened because of its connection with the Fatih Mosque
complex (Figure 4). At the intersection of the Kara Sarıklı Street with the Aşık Ali
Paşa Street corners were beveled according to rule of his typology (Çelik, 1990).

Figure 3. Changing morphology of the İmrahor neighborhood between 1850-1870. First map
shows the pre-fired area of Imrahor (Mühendishane-I Berri-i Hümayun, 1847), (Kayra, 1990);
Second map shows the post-fired condition Imrahor with the grid layout (Ayverdi, 1978).

5
14th IPHS CONFERENCE 12-15 July 2010 Istanbul-TURKEY

Figure 4. Changing morphology of the Küçük Mustafa Paşa region between 1850-1870. First
map shows the pre-fired area of Küçük Mustafa Paşa (Mühendishane-I Berri-i Hümayun,
1847), (Kayra, 1990); Second map shows the post-fired condition Küçük Mustafa Paşa with
the grid layout (Ayverdi, 1978).
Luigi Storari also designed Boyacıköy as a new settlement area at the hillside of the
Emirgan with the same idea (Figure 5). Name of the village comes from the family
of Kafrariyofi whose task was painting the serge and fez in the period of Sultan
Selim III. After the Storari planning some of the Armenian and Rum neighborhoods
were appeared in the region (Artan, 1994). Typology of the village has same
characteristics with the designs of the burned areas in the Historical Peninsula: grid
layout, square with the beveled corners. Design includes forty-five blocks, which
have approximately a size of seventy meters to seventy meters (Çelik, 1990).

Figure 5. Morphology of the Boyacıköy village, 1918. (Kayra, 1990)

In 1856, a fire destroyed 111 building in Salma Tomruk neighborhood close to

Edirnekapı. A document which bears a seal in Arab characters and the title of
Storari denotes the condition of the house and retail buildings in the environment

6
U R B A N T R A N S F O R M A T I O N : CONTROVERSIES, CONTRASTS and CHALLENGES

as topographically (Figure 6). Planning probably designed by Storari and the pre-
fired and post-fired conditions of the neighborhood are drawn side by side in the
document. Plans are drawn in color on the same plate, left side has the record of
the previous state and the right side has the state of current project. It is mainly
composed of rectangles very close to the edge, divided into four equal rectangles.
Design goes to the periphery of the area. In junction of the main two arteries,
corners are beveled again to emphasize the square function. Some streets are
ended with the cul-de-sacs and some of them are opened to very narrow passages
(Yerasimos, 1995).

Figure 6. Changing morphology of the Salma Tomruk neighborhood between 1850-1870. Left
side of the map shows pre-fired area of Salma Tomruk, Right side of the map shows post-
fired condition Salma Tomruk with the grid layout (Kayra, 1990).

CONCLUSIONS

Two important facts structured the nineteenth century urban transformation in

Istanbul. One of these is westernization activity that began with the Tanzimat
philosophy and the other is the huge fires that occurred in the nineteenth century.
These facts, which constitute a cause to each other, found its correspondence in
western planning models in the urban fabric. At the beginning, conceptualization
and the application of the projects were experienced by foreign architect and
engineers.
Storari applied the first grid layout system in Ottoman Istanbul in nineteenth
century. He also introduced first subdivision system in urban planning. Grid layouts
designed by him have some differences from the others practiced by Turkish
planners after him. His designs resemble the Roman Grid: two main arteries are
widened – like in Cardo and Documanus – and the junction of these arteries are
converted to square by beveling the corners – like a Roman Forum. His grid
planning system even can be supported by the concepts of centrality, orientation
and landmark, its importance also lies in the social life brought to the city:
geometrical planning, standardization, subdivision system, gathering place and
extrovert life.
According to the morphology of planning, Storari’s designs commonly settle down
to the sloping areas but the squares with the beveled corners are placed to the flat
areas as possible. Blocks sizes vary from forty meter to seventy and fifty meter to
one hundred meter. Admittedly sizes are related with the pre-fired privileges of

7
14th IPHS CONFERENCE 12-15 July 2010 Istanbul-TURKEY

the property owners. But in all occasions block sizes in the planning of Luigi Storari
are in the humane limits (Siksna, 1997).
Storari plans still maintain its existence in the urban fabric of the Historical
Peninsula of Istanbul as an urban memory. Altering life conditions also act on these
layouts in a different ways. First effect is the changing of lot sizes. Amalgamation
of the lots according to the current requirements of the inhabitants, have
dramatically affected the size of the lots and scale of the environment. Increase in
the number of stories of the buildings is approximately one hundred percent in
many areas of the Storari layouts which cause loses of characteristics of the streets
(Figure 7). In certain neighborhoods such as Imrahor and Salma Tomruk,
deformations in the square corners can be observed. In former, two corners are
turned to right angels and the latter, incomplete corners can be seen. Above all,
Aksaray square is beyond recognition (Gurer and Gozek, 2009).

Figure 7. Increased number of stories in the Aksaray and Imrahor had caused to deformation
of the urban fabric dramatically (Gürer and Gözek, 2009)

Transformation of the cities can only be understood with their historical past.
Historical awareness in urban planning often remains in individual features. There
is little sense of how they fit together in cityscape and relate to one another and
are part of a process of change. We experience the results of a lack of this kind of
awareness in last fifty years in the historical areas of Istanbul. In this process
Storari grid layouts has also been affected in negative way.

REFERENCES
Ardaman, E. (2007) “Perspective and Istanbul, The Capital of the Ottoman
Empire”, Journal of Design History, Vol. 20 No: 2, 110-111
Artan, T. (1994) “Boyacıköy”, Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, Kültür
Bakanlığı ve Tarih Vakfı Ortak Yayınları, İstanbul, cilt 2, 316
Ayverdi, E. H. (1978) 19. Asırda İstanbul Haritası, İstanbul Fetih Cemiyeti, İstanbul
Enstitüsü Yayınları, Baha Matbaası, İstanbul, 4
Çelik, Z. (1990) “The Italian Contribution To The Remaking of Istanbul”,
Environmental Design: Journal of the Islamic Environmental Design Research
Center, 128-133
Çelik, Z. (1996) 19. Yüzyılda Osmanlı Başkenti Değişen İstanbul, Çeviren: Selim
Deringil, Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, İstanbul
Ergin, O. N. (1914-1922) Mecelle-i, Umur-u Belediye, İstanbul, I, 1318, aktaran,
Çelik, Z. (1990), “The Italian Contribution To The Remaking of Istanbul”,

8
U R B A N T R A N S F O R M A T I O N : CONTROVERSIES, CONTRASTS and CHALLENGES

Environmental Design: Journal of the Islamic Environmental Design Research

Center, 128-133
Gurer, T.K. and Gozek, P. (2009) “An Analysis On Sustainablity of Urban Space:
Nineteenth Century Small Squares of Istanbul”, 5th International Symposium on
Sınan: Design Language in Historical Areas, 02-03 April 2009, Trakya University
Faculty of Engineering & Architecture, Edirne, 29-36
Kayra, C. (1990) İstanbul Zamanlar ve Mekanlar, Ak Yayınlar, İstanbul
Kuban, D. (1996) İstanbul Bir Kent Tarihi, Bizantion, Konstantinopolis, İstanbul,
Çeviren: Zeynep Rona, Türkiye Ekonomik ve Toplumsal Tarih Vakfı, İstanbul
Ortaylı, İ. (1985) Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyete Yerel Yönetim Geleneği, Hil Yayın,
İstanbul, s. 31, aktaran, Ardaman, E. (2007), “Perspective and Istanbul, The Capital
of the Ottoman Empire”, Journal of Design History, Vol. 20 No: 2, 110
Pertusier, C. (1820) Picturesque Promenades in and near Constantinople and on the
Waters of the Bosphorus, London, aktaran, Denel, S. (1982), Batılılaşma Sürecinde
İstanbul'da Tasarım ve Dış Mekânlarda Değişim ve Nedenleri, ODTÜ, Ankara, 49
Siksna, A. (1997) “The Evolution of Block Size and Form in North American and
Australian City Centers”, Urban Morphology, Paris, France, 19-33
Tekeli, İ. (1999) “19. Yüzyılda İstanbul Metropol Alanının Dönüşümü”, içinde,
Dumont, P. ve Georgeon, F. (edt.), 1999, Modernleşme Sürecinde Osmanlı Kentleri,
Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, ikinci baskı, İstanbul.
Wheler, G. (1723) Voyage de Dalmatie, de Grece et du Levant, O, La Haye, Rutgert
Albert, aktaran, Denel, S. (1982), Batılılaşma Sürecinde İstanbul'da Tasarım ve Dış
Mekanlarda Değişim ve Nedenleri, ODTÜ, Ankara, 49
Yerasimos, S. (1995) “Quelques Éléments Sur L'ingénieur Luigi Storari”, Convegno,
“Architettura e architetti italiani ad Istanbul tra il XIX e il XX secolo”, Instituto
Italiano di Cultura, Facolta di Architettura dell' Universita Mimar Sinan, 27-28
Novembre 1995, Istanbul, 117-123
Yerasimos, S. (1996) “Batılılaşma Sürecinde İstanbul”, içinde Dünya Kenti İstanbul,
Türkiye Ekonomik ve Toplumsal Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, İstanbul, 48-54
Yerasimos, S. (1999) “Tanzimat'ın Kent Reformları Üzerine”, içinde, Dumont, P., ve
Georgeon, F., (edt.), 1999, Modernleşme Sürecinde Osmanlı Kentleri, Tarih Vakfı
Yurt Yayınları, ikinci baskı, İstanbul.